Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw
yes, the top continues to create wealth, it's what they do and Obama is fortunate to have them to deamonize as he creates more debt
|
Seems like they like it
Quote:
WASHINGTON, Oct. 19 (UPI) -- Democratic President Barack Obama is blowing away his Republican challengers when it comes to soliciting donations on Wall Street, fundraising figures show.
The Washington Post reported Wednesday its analysis of contribution data reveals Obama has raised more from the financial and banking sector this year than all of the GOP presidential hopefuls combined.
|
Perhaps it like battered wife syndrome?
Read more:
Obama pulling in Wall Street donations - UPI.com
Quote:
the s#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&g sound that you hear is from the growing permanent dependent class and according to USA Today last June " That brings to a record $61.6 trillion the total of financial promises not paid for." (Federally) or $535,000 per household
U.S. funding for future promises lags by trillions - USATODAY.com
plus 5.2 Trillion for State and Local unfunded obligations
Obamanomics will continue to shrink the middle, deamonize the top and massively expand the permanent dependent "s#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&g" class as it expands the scope and role of government which is the ultimate objective.....
If you read Jim's post you'll see that the shrinking of the middle is much bigger than Obama...as is the debt and dependence.
|
Perhaps that's Obama's point, that we have "underlying structural problems". Not sure where I've heard that before though...
Quote:
it won't be "greedy corporations" that cause the downfall of American Society, it will be government unable to control itself or pay it's way....corporations are just a convenient target for those who see private business as nothing more than a source of greater funding for their lunacy 
|
The problem with your assertion is that both democratic and republican politicians resemble your remark.
One might then intuit that ideology has little to do with the problem, and that you're entire premise is fundamentally invalid. You should read his speech again.
-spence